How federal is India today?

The Constitution of India, adopted on January 26 in 1950, established a federal structure of governance for a country that had just come out of colonial rule. It helped diverse regions come together without losing their autonomy.

Ahead of the 74th Republic Day on Thursday, Metrolife asked experts in Bengaluru how our federalism was faring.

‘Majoritarianism is eroding dialogue’

We are witnessing the worst assault on Indian federalism. Quite a few important national decisions have been taken without consulting the states — the National Education Policy, demonetisation, removal of Article 370, Citizenship Amendment Act, farm laws, and lockdowns that pushed labourers to the streets. Institutions such as the Planning Commission, which provided a space for consultation between the centre and states, have been dissolved.

The essence of a democracy is in consultation and conversation. We need to look at the centre and states as equal partners for resource sharing, for preserving regional diversity and culture, and for the survival of our federal character. But that sense of partnership is missing.

We have been hearing the call for one nation, one language, one religion, one culture these days. The rise of a majoritarian government with no opposition has accelerated the erosion of dialogue.

— Prof S Japhet, former Vice Chancellor, Bengaluru City University, and visiting professor at NLSIU

‘Delhi’s control is hegemonic’

Over the years, there has been a tremendous push by the Union government to centralise power and usurp power from the states. For example, policies on health, education and food security in Bihar cannot be the same as those in Kerala and Tamil Nadu, yet many of these are centralised schemes.

NEET is another bad example. By centralising college seat allocation, a Punjabi student could end up in a college in West Bengal, where she or he has no incentive to stay back and work, while if the power were given to locals, people would benefit in tune with their needs.

We pretend the same governance is needed in all corners of the country, which is untrue.

We elect governments at each tier as it is clear that the centre cannot represent every nook and corner of the country. States stand to lose through unitary and anti-federal tendencies that take away local capacity to realise the aspirations of people. Delhi’s control over the destiny of the far reaches of India is hegemonic.

— Tara Krishnaswamy, founder of Political Shakti, a non-partisan women’s collective

‘Will there be a pushback?’

In terms of power, the focus is primarily on the centre. But in the southern states and others like West Bengal, regional parties are gaining more political support.

In the past, we have seen an electoral pushback to centralisation. What remains to be seen is if there would be a pushback this time or not. We are dealing with a dynamic situation and that is how all societies grow.

— Prof Narendar Pani, Dean, School of Social Sciences, National Institute of Advanced Studies

‘Many areas usurped by Union government’

Budgeting for children, women, the disabled and senior citizens was a state subject. Now, it is literally and figuratively being decided by the Union government. Even labour laws, and language policies for primary and secondary schools have been usurped by the Union government, and public consultation is not happening.

States have certainly lost out on their independence, which was guaranteed (in the Constitution). This is not the federalism that was envisaged by the fathers who prepared our Constitution and wanted India to be a Union of states.

— Brinda Adige, civil and human rights activist

‘GST Council is anti-federal’

The centralisation of power is obvious. There are 98 subjects on the Union list, 59 on the state list, and 52 on the concurrent (shared) list. In the last 70 years, not a single subject has moved from the centre to the state. But look at education, it has gone from being a state subject to a concurrent subject. Or, look at the anti-federal structure of the GST Council. To make or change any rule, the Council needs 75% votes, of which, 33.3% lies with the centre. If the states need a policy, they would need the centre’s share of votes to move things. Worse, the policies drafted at the centre are not circulated in all languages. That is against the spirit of the Indian Union.

— Arun Javgal, language activist